Related

This may be “educational,” but I’m worried about what sort of education is being dispensed. The narrator in the video is speaking to the viewer from the perspective that the viewer is boycotting Israel, and is very sarcastic. Throughout the video, the narrator implies that any person who wants to boycott Israel is likely to be an Arab, a terrorist, holding stereotypes against Jews, ignorant (or dismissive) of Jewish accomplishments and kind Jews, or demonizing of Jews. The narrator generalizes all people opposing Israeli policies through boycott to be in some form extremist, and that’s a questionable message to send to anyone.

So I’m not sure what this video is achieving, other than further antagonizing the already tense divides in opinion on Israel’s policies with the Palestinian state. What is a viewer that is supportive of Israeli policies supposed to take away from this video, other than a sense of justification in dismissing people who disagree with them? What is a viewer that is unsupportive of Israeli policies supposed to take away from this video, other than feelings of being insulted and dismissed?

The controversy about Israel’s wall in the Palestinian state ( http://youtu.be/clbpyNePW5k ) is a very serious issue, and I question whether or not people involved in the debate should be satirizing and demonizing one another.

my point with posting this video was to inform of what the news networks, especially CNN is forgetting, or selecting not to show. specifically the part about the healthcare and charitable organization that help and benefit the Palestinians. A common media strategy is “if it bleeds it leads”, showing the bloody side of the conflict from both sides. But you don’t see them showing the humanizing aspect, again of both sides.

And in regards to the wall in the Palestinian “state”, I really don’t want to get all political, especially due to the fact that its hard for me to distance myself from the topic and be objective, but from a person who was there and saw the wall, its merely a precaution that has been built after a series of debates within the Israeli government and with other nations, especially the US, and is serving a clear purpose. that purpose is negotiable depending on what side of it you are standing.

Critically reading your first paragraph, it almost appears as if you’re saying that you want news networks to dedicate more air-time to terrorist attacks. I’m not so sure that’s a good thing, though that may depend on what you believe the role of institutional journalism to be. When people think of journalism’s most lauded works (exposing Watergate, Abu Ghraib, etc.), the role of journalism has always been to keep a check on the actions of other major institutional actors with power — namely government and business. At least that’s the ideal role of journalism — the news is admittedly inundated with stories that generate fear and hype, about crime, terror from abroad, and the next viral pandemic. While news corporations may be incentivized by profit to scare people with stories about crimes and plagues, the job of journalists, I hope, is still to keep an eye on the actions of government and business — the institutions which hold power in society. And debates regarding the purpose and effects of the Israeli government’s wall aside, it’s evident that the Israeli government, in any situation regarding the Palestinian territories, is the institution of power and authority — politically, economically, and militarily.

Though, I have to ask, what exactly do you mean by “showing the humanizing aspect” of “both sides”? What does “showing the humanizing aspect” of the Israeli government entail? What are the “both sides”? Because I think Israelis themselves as people are already humanized, in that in our media they are considerably less marked than Arabs are.

I also want to clarify that I’m not asserting in any of my comments a political judgment or analysis of Israel’s policies; I don’t think I know enough about foreign affairs in the Middle East to comment on policy there. While I may have a critical perspective towards the wall, I’m not trying to comment on political positions. Instead, I’m relegating my comments to questions about media and representation.